Re: [tlug] silicon cash eater

[dblomber <dblomber@example.com>]

On 2017/06/29 21:33, Benjamin Kowarsch wrote:
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 21:10, Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The only way to make energy from nuclear fission economically viable
> > > is to cut down on safety.
> > Nope. See above.
> Your "see above" is nothing more than nuclear power industry propaganda.
>
> Without government subsidies nuclear energy would be too expensive to sell. That's fact.
>
> And Fukushima is a good example of cost cutting without any concern for safety whatsoever.
>
> Which f***ing idiot would have been so f***ing stupid to put a backup diesel generator for emergency cooling on the ground between the beach and the plant?
>
> Not the dumbest idiot on the planet would be that dumb.
>
> And how much money would it have cost to lift those generators up and install them on the roof?
Just a thought here. If the generators were put on the roof, and the 
reactor was leaking radiation, for some reason, there would be no access 
to the generators for servicing them. Each time I hear this argument, I 
think it is as bad as the idea of burying them in the ground. There is 
also the part of, I have never heard about drainage implemented on the 
generators in the ground... was it considered? was it there? if so, why 
did it fail? It is always easy to criticize, but I just do not have the 
technical details on the design to say more than it "Appears" to be 
poorly planned, to say it was stupid design I could only say, if, if I 
could get details about the drainage planning that was or was not 
considered in the design and addressing why it failed. Even the best 
designs do fail, was this a systems failure, or was it idioticy in action?

David